I've had js turned off by default for many years now, and don't feel like I'm missing out on anything important. Your mileage, of course, may vary.

You're a stronger person than me.

I keep trying to live without JS but so little of the internet works.

* Gitlab/Github (obviously)

* Google maps (obviously)

* Linkedin... (uh... less obviously)

* Outlook

* Infoq.com

* Rust docs

* Google Cloud Docs

etc;

A lot of the internet is butchered without JS.

I really want a way of just blocking third-party JS (IE; the site can deliver JS, but not anything it tries to import unless whitelisted). But that seems to be hard with qutebrowser.

FWIW uMatrix apparently has a method doing this.

Perhaps I did not express it clearly, but I do not browse WITHOUT ANY JAVASCRIPT EVER. I browse with js disabled by default, but enable it (using excellent uMatrix Firefox addon) for certain sites that I trust. Although even then I try to find the least possible amount of uMatrix permissions that enables the functionality I need from a site.

That said, I do not use many of the obvious mainstream sites - e.g. I ditched Github like dirty socks the moment Microsoft grabbed them.

But yes, modern web (not the Internet, mind you) is very damaged, and I fear it will take decades to fix the damage, once (I hope) smarter people take the reins after high-visibility security and privacy incidents become more and more frequent, and, well, more visible to general public.

I use noScript with "Allow None by Default" on Firefox while I'm at work and should in theory only be browsing docs anyway. Trying to blanket ban third-party JS wouldn't really work b/c many sites have their legitimate JS on various CDNs. After enabling individual scripts on maybe a dozen sites I'm in good shape when it comes to web browsing day to day.

They’re also using your labor to train models by serving you pages and checking which links you click. No js required.

Just because he's being exploited by Google in one way doesn't mean he has to allow himself to be exploited in every possible way.

Do you consider "exploitation" here to be negative or unethical?

He is willingly using Google because the provide amazingly useful services completely free of monetary charge. Are you objecting to the fact that Google benefits in some way by providing this service?

If you care about being exploited, it’s worthwhile to know when it’s happening, so you can consider your return on effort for avoiding it.